'War on Terrorism" and "War in Iraq" are not the same . Got it ?

[kentuck]

The Bush regime never hesitates to compare the "war on terrorism" to other great struggles in our lifetimes, such as WWII and the Cold War. It is important that the "war on terrorism" be seen as something huge in our lives. It is a struggle for our very liberty and freedom. They want to kill all Americans, we are told.

There is no doubt that we were attacked on September the 11th, 2001. It would have been terrible, even if the WTC had not collapsed. There were many casualties in the planes and the Pentagon also. There was little doubt that there had to be retribution for the acts. The question is, how much retribution should we seek for the dastardly act of 9/11?

We were told that it was perpetrated by Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda terrorists. So, in cooperation with Pakistan to permit flyover of their territory, we hit Osama and the Taliban hard in Afghanistan. At one time, we were told that we had Osama encircled within a 12 mile circle. Somehow he managed to escape. We thought he was in the caves near Tora Bora and we made gravel out of most of that area with our bombs.

We were making progress on the "war on terrorism". But, in the middle of the "war on terrorism", we invaded Iraq. Why?? It seems that there were individuals within the Adminsitration, and Bush himself, that had planned on getting Saddam Hussein before they ever came into office.

In a matter of days, we had marched into Baghdad and turned over the statues of Saddam and met slight resistance in the process. Many in the Iraqi Army simply disappeared into the night. Bush flew on board an aircraft carrier and pronounced "Mission Accomplished". However, the "war on Iraq" had just begun.

The political strategists around Bush, Karl Rove and others, recommended that the "war" should be the primary issue in the campaign of 2002. And the Repubs were quite successful with that strategy. They were talking about getting a veto-proof majority in the Senate and increasin their numbers in the House.

However, matters started to deteriorate with the "war in Iraq". Casualties mounted and the resistance grew more intense. Bush and the Repubs began saying that the "war in Iraq" was the center of the "war on terrorism". It was beat into the conscience of America. The worse things got in Iraq, the bigger the "war on terrorism" became.

But, the sad truth is that, the "war in Iraq" never really had anything to do with the "war on terrorism". We were making great progress with the war on terrorism - even if we had not yet captured Osama bin Laden. We kept a small contingent in Afghanistan but they were mostly forgotten as we carried on the new "war in Iraq".

The bottom line is that if Bush and the Repubs are not permitted to tie the invasion of Iraq with the "war on terrorism", they will have a difficult political row to hoe. But, if they are successful in tying Saddam Hussein to terrorism and the American people accept their premise, then they believe they will win the next election and keep power in this country.

[library_max]

1. The counterargument is twofold.

First, that the war in Iraq is creating terrorism, by sticking an Amnerican thumb in the eye of Islam. Lest we forget, Baghdad is the historic capital of Islam just as Rome is the historic capital of Catholic Christianity. And we invaded them on no provocation.

Second, that the war in Iraq is pulling money, personnel, and attention away from the real war against Al Quaeda in Afghanistan.

If you happen to be talking to an intelligent person, you might also mention that there is no war on terrorism, that you can't make war on an abstraction and expect to win. But I wouldn't chance that with an average American audience.

[kentuck]

2. And I think there is a good argument....

to say that we are creating more terrorists than we are destroying. The question that I ask myself is, where would the war on terrorism be today if we HAD NOT invaded Iraq. I think we may have demoralized and defeated most of the terrorist or would-be terrorists in the world and their numbers would have dwindled considerably. I have no proof of that but I suspect that was a high probablility.

[opihimoimoi]

4. A poly fold effect also is hidden into the equation. Employment.

As the Fear Factor expands, so does the need for security. Thus we see tons of people searching our bags at the airports. Its over the top. Hundreds of thousands of people looking at dirty panties and mens soiled briefs at our airport check ins. Good Lord. and stinky socks too. Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Osama got us chasing nightmares.

This war on terror has created a new industry gone amok. For a few lives and a few thousand dollars, Osama has cost America $$Trillions in lost productivity and waste. Bush zero, Osama way ahead.

We are so stupid so arrogant, we don't even know we are in Denial.

[MallRat]

3. HEAR, HEAR!

And that is precisely why, at every single opportunity in daily conversation, I ALWAYS differentiate between the "war on terrorism" and the "war in Iraq."

Without constant reminding, your average American is likely to lump them both together as one big, nebulous military action to kill the nasty "towelheads" somewhere over there.

-MR

[kentuck]

5. We should all take your example...

otherwise, the Bush regime plans on using the "war on terrorism" to march back into the White House.